Jacob Sullum | May 18, 2007
Firefox, the Idaho-based supplier of
chemicals and materials to pyrotechnic enthusiasts, has lost its
legal battle with the Consumer Products Safety Commission, which is
determined to protect firework fans from themselves by preventing
them from pursuing their hobby. Firefox and its
supporters argue that the CPSC has exceeded its statutory authority
by targeting fireworks produced by hobbyists for their own
use, which can be legally assembled and set off at sites overseen
by federally licensed manufacturers. But on April 30, U.S. District
Judge B. Lynn Winmill sided with the CPSC, approving the limits it
demanded on Firefox's sales, a precedent the company's
customers fear will ultimately make their hobby
impractical.
Here is Winmill's April 30 decision (PDF), including the injunction sought by the CPSC, which takes effect at the end of June. The Fireworks Foundation's John Steinberg discusses it here, advising hobbyists to "purchase whatever you think you're going to need for the foreseeable future to the extent that you can afford it."
Brian Doherty covered the Firefox case in the May 2005 issue of reason. The Fireworks Foundation, which has been collecting donations for Firefox's legal defense, has background information here. Skylighter, another chemical supplier, bemoaned Judge Winmill's summary judgment for the government in its December 21 newsletter. The Fireworks Alliance, which is "dedicated to keeping fireworks legal and preserving the tradition of fireworks for all Americans," is here. Last year, Robert Stacy McCain celebrated that cause on the eve of Independence Day.
[Thanks to Robert Goodman for the tip.]
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Danged bibertarians. Honestly, we're not going to be free of them until we've re-engineered man to be invulnerable.
The Fireworks Foundation's John Steinberg discusses it here,
advising hobbyists to "purchase whatever you think you're going to
need for the foreseeable future to the extent that you can afford
it."
Hmmm, a bunch of people buying as much black powder as they can
afford at one time. I think I see the law of unintended
consequences with this regulation.
ProGLib:
hier is your
man...
psst - BP - ohnoes! you just reminded me of the senior campers'
favorite game at summer camp...
It's to be hoped this will have some positive backlash from even the sheeple, since "Independence Day" has long been more about image than substance, which is exactly the same reversal of priorities exhibited in American culture. In the same vein, those who didn't complain about or even notice the accelerating erosion of their actual rights, may actually sit up and start bleating when their precious privileges, bread and circuses are threatened throughly increasingly onerous "copy protections" (i.e., access blocking) of digital media.
In some ways, this is probably for the best. Now the children will be safe from the second-hand smoke generated by the fireworks. And the noise pollution. Not to mention the ounces of carbon kicked up in the atmosphere.
. . .since "Independence Day" has long been more about image than substance. . . .
Well, we are still independent from the British, right? I think the
Cubans still celebrate independence from the Spanish, too. What's
telling is that we don't mark Constitution Day with similar
fanfare. Or how about Liberty Day?
Alternative sources exist for the chemicals that one would need to make a boom, but what's threatened here mostly is access by amateurs to those chems which are sold as being particularly suitable due to their purity for making good colored lights. Amateurs can't come anywhere near the pros in terms of volume of output, but frequently far exceed them in terms of quality of individual items. Certain effects such as strobe rockets are seen only among hobbyists.
This is of no real consequence. REAL 'Mericuns buy fireworks made in Red China from Red Indians on reservations.
When are you unimportant crackpot Libertarians going to realize that nobody cares about this issue.
When are you unimportant crackpot Libertarians going to
realize that nobody cares about this issue.
Probably right after the assohole authoritarians realize its none
of their fucking business.
Whether the majority of people are too dense to understand why more freedom is better than less freedom has little to do with the rightness or wrongness of the libertarian position.
The Fireworks Foundation's John Steinberg discusses it here,
advising hobbyists to "purchase whatever you think you're going to
need for the foreseeable future to the extent that you can afford
it."
I see SWAT teams raiding the houses looking for "stockpiles of
explosives."
Has anybody checked for political contributions from folks named
Grucci or Bartolotta?
At least George Plimpton didn't live to see this.
Kevin
Apparently America continues to become more and more unfriendly to anyone that has a peculiar hobby. Why won't normal people just leave us eccentrics alone?
I see SWAT teams raiding the houses looking for "stockpiles of
explosives."
No joke, I know someone that happened to.
I'll bet America was one hell of a country back before the
nannyists and the tyrannical thugs fucked everything up. Wish I
could have seen it back then.
George, John, Sam, Ben I'm so damned sorry.
Well, we are still independent from the British,
right?
Yeah, but it's getting to be a Frying Pan-->Fire thing.
My favorite part of the Fourth is our Community Patriotic Sing.
Every year I get volunteered to read the Declaration of
Independence.
Might be a good libertarian thing to glance around your community
and see if there's a venue that will let you do the same.
"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one
people to dissolve the political bands..."
This case involves a firm that sells supplies for the
manufacture of shells, rockets, etc. But some of the items they
sell -- mainly fuse -- are used by hobbyists to put together their
backyard shows. with ordinary consumer fireworks.
The specifics of the Firefox case are a bit complex, and it is not
certain whether the restrictions on Firefox will be applied to
other pyro-supply firms.. The big concern is that this case
establishes a precedent of federal agencies cracking down on such
companies because of alleged violations and -- rather than imposing
a fine, as would be n\ormal in most other regulatory affairs --
instead imposing restrictions on their business that have the
effect of putting them out of business.
I think the concern goes beyond merely the fireworks industry, but
admittedly fireworks is a special case because so many people are
ignorant of (and prejudiced against) amateur pyrotechics. The judge
in this case clearly failed to understand (or else supported) the
basic anti-business nature of the CPSC's demands in the Firefox
case. Rather than fining Firefox for its past infractions, and
putting them on probation to ensure future compliance, CPSC wanted
to impose unprecedented special conditions on the company.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245